Senate GOP leaders hold news conference as Trump says U.S. 'not finished' in Iran

[0:00] do, one of which would be a market structure bill, that's something that's a candidate for [0:04] consideration. The Lindsey O. Graham sanctioning Russia legislation is also something that's being [0:10] worked on and is something I hope we can get the necessary support to get to the floor. And then [0:16] obviously a defense authorization bill which was voted down on the motion to proceed last week [0:22] by the Democrats is something that also normally is a bipartisan piece of legislation. But none of [0:28] those things get done if the Democrats continue their posture of trying to block even getting [0:34] on legislation. And again I use the defense authorization bill as an example of something that we've done [0:39] for 65 years in a row which last week the Democrats decided even though many of, not many of them, [0:44] but a number of them had voted for the legislation when it came out of the Armed Services Committee [0:49] decided to block its consideration on the floor. So that's something that ought to be able to get [0:53] done. And then obviously the most important thing that we need to do is to fund the government. [0:58] And on that front, Chair Susan Collins is working with Democrats on the Appropriations Committee [1:04] to find a path forward to have a continuing resolution to keep the government funded to get [1:10] past the November elections so that we don't have the specter of a government shutdown, something [1:16] that happened a couple of times this last year. And the disruption, the chaos that creates [1:21] is just something that both sides ought to be willing to try and avoid. And so I think it's [1:27] going to be really important that we figure out a path forward to get a bipartisan agreement [1:32] to fund the government that will keep government open and ensure that government employees are [1:38] getting paid. And that is something that I intend to bring to the floor for a vote before the August break. Senator Barrasso. [1:46] Senator Barrasso. [1:49] Well, today's Democrat Party is being driven by extremists. It's the extremists who are winning [1:55] primary elections. Democrats seem to be determined to destroy America. We have a socialist mayor [2:02] in New York and one will soon be in the District of Columbia as well. When you take a look at [2:08] the people that have been winning Democrat primaries this year, there are people who want to defund [2:14] the police, raise taxes and open the borders. There are people that want free health care [2:20] for illegal immigrants paid for by American taxpayers. And they would rather defend and [2:26] protect illegal immigrant criminals than law abiding American citizens. We know according [2:32] to their manifesto, they want to pack the Supreme Court. They want to put judges in place who [2:37] will deny the law, defy the Constitution. Their manifesto says that they want to eliminate [2:43] the Electoral College. They want to eliminate the Senate so that people in the Senate leadership [2:48] on the Republican side, the people we represent, their voices would be silent. It's so disturbing [2:55] that one of the nominees for Congress, Democrat nominee, has boasted and posted the fact that [3:02] when her hands were dirty, she wiped them on the American flag. That's the agenda of these [3:07] people. They are reckless. They are terrible in terms of what they would do to America. They're [3:15] extreme. They're dangerous. They're scary. The American people don't want that. The American [3:19] people demand and deserve better. And Republicans are going to continue to fight for freedom, [3:26] for liberty, and for continued American greatness. [3:29] The House seems intent to push ahead with Reconciliation 3.0. I know you said last week [3:39] that you were surprised that they were going to do this. Is this just an academic exercise [3:44] by the House? But once you get that, if you get that, do you genuinely think that you're [3:48] going to consider that and when? Well, we'll see what they get done this week and what it [3:54] all consists of. I will say that if they give us a budget resolution as a vehicle, we will [4:03] hold that, subject to obviously being able to move a continuing resolution to fund the government. [4:09] It's a possibility that if necessary, we could pull that budget resolution passed by the House [4:16] and use it to fund government. I hope that's not necessary. As I said, we've had conversations, [4:21] productive conversations, on both sides of the aisle on a funding resolution that would [4:26] carry us past the November election. For clarity, hold it until September when you're [4:30] right up against that or try to do this immediately? Well, we're going to try and get the, as I said [4:35] earlier, we'll try and, we will get a vote on a continuing resolution to fund the government [4:41] in this work period. And so, but until that time, if, so yeah, in all likelihood, depending [4:47] on when that happens, when we can get that to pop, and that depends a little bit on cooperation [4:51] right now, it's possible that that would be something that would get punted into September, [4:57] yeah. Peter Thun, given the Democrats' intent, being intent on taking down your agenda, divisions [5:05] in your own party over things like save and deficit spending, and then the loss of working [5:12] majorities on at least two committees, including appropriations with the absence of Senator McConnell, [5:17] the passing of Senator Graham. What is the best that you can hope for, other than just a CR, [5:24] in getting passed before the November election? [5:27] I, I think that that list, as I've said, probably starts with market structure. [5:33] I think we're nearing, I'm hoping there will be text available on that, yet later today, [5:39] that we can get that up on the floor. I think the Russia sanctions bill is something, too, [5:44] that we're sort of homing in on, finalizing final text on that, that's available for consideration [5:50] on the floor. I would say, again, defense authorization, but that's going to be subject to Democrats being [5:56] willing to let us get on it. But that historically has been a bipartisan thing, and something that all of us, [6:02] I believe, at least on this side of the aisle, think that's something we ought to be able to get done. [6:08] And for all the reasons, and look at the world today, national security ought to be objective [6:14] and job number one. And for whatever reasons, the Democrats have walked away from that issue. [6:20] So that's something. And then I would say, you know, there are other things out there, permitting reform, NIL. [6:25] There are a number of things that, as I said, are candidates for bipartisan legislation. [6:31] The question is going to be, to what level the Democrats want to participate in that? [6:36] And, you know, can we get 60 votes on the floor of the Senate to get some of those things across the finish line? [6:42] So that's where it's going to come back to. [6:43] Initially, the President said that the war would last just a handful of weeks. [6:48] Now it's been several months, and three more service members have died. [6:52] They're asking for $67 billion in taxpayer money to fund this. [6:56] Do you think the American public believes that this war is going in the right trajectory? [7:01] Would you say it is going in the right path? [7:04] Mr. I think what the President did in response to the Iranians violating the ceasefire [7:11] was to make it clear that we weren't going to tolerate that. [7:15] And I think his objective is getting the straight open. [7:18] The Iranians are violating international law by blocking the shipping lanes in the Strait of Hormuz. [7:25] So I think the President has, within his authority, obviously, based upon not only the law, [7:32] but also, I think, based upon the way the Iranians have reacted to the ceasefire [7:38] and an unwillingness to sit down and actually make a deal, [7:41] I think the President's actions are designed to force them back to the table. [7:45] And I hope that that's effective and successful. [7:47] We all do. [7:49] And in the meantime, I think most of us, at least, [7:51] believe that we ought to support our men and women in uniform [7:55] and hope and pray that they're successful. [7:57] But, Leader, do you believe that the administration needs to be more transparent [8:01] about their plan forward before Congress authorizes additional funding [8:06] and the hundreds of billions of dollars potentially in a war supplemental? [8:09] Well, I think that the supplemental, obviously, isn't just about Iran. [8:13] The supplemental is about replacing munitions. [8:15] And there was a need for that well before Iran. [8:19] But let's assume your premise. [8:21] I think that that is the area in which we have some control over issues like this. [8:28] And the power of the purse, the ability of the Congress to weigh in on matters like this. [8:33] But the request that they've submitted, I think, is something that most of our colleagues [8:40] are going to be willing to support. [8:42] There are some concerns about whether or not it will be offset, [8:44] whether or not it will be paid for. [8:46] There are concerns some of our colleagues are going to be about, is it enough? [8:49] And the level that's been requested by the administration. [8:53] So we will have those discussions if and when we can get a bill like that on the floor. [8:58] Right now, I don't know when that happens. [9:00] But I know there's a sincere interest on our side in trying to accommodate the need [9:05] that our military has to be prepared to face any kind of threat that we face around the world. [9:10] Leader, do you have Chairman Cotton here for an update on Jay Clayton's nomination, [9:16] whether you guys anticipate getting him through before the August recess, [9:20] and FISA as well, the reauthorization with the status of all that is? [9:24] The committee just voted to move Mr. Clayton's nomination to the full Senate. [9:32] What was the vote on that? [9:34] Was that a party line vote? [9:35] Nine to eight. [9:37] Leader Thun. [9:38] Senator Fetterman has indicated that if Democrats officially become anti-Israel, [9:42] he would leave the party. [9:43] Have you had any conversations with him about maybe joining the GOP conference? [9:46] And would you welcome him if he were to offer that? [9:50] Yes, we would welcome him. [9:52] Can you talk to him about it? [9:53] I haven't talked to him recently. [9:55] I have had conversations with him in the past, as have many of my colleagues, [9:59] about the challenges he faces in his caucus. [10:04] And, you know, there are many of us who, I think, would welcome the opportunity [10:10] to have him join the Republican conference. [10:12] But, you know, ultimately that's a decision that's up to him. [10:15] And if they, as Senator Barrasso pointed out in his remarks, I mean, [10:19] this is a party that's moving further and further more radically and to the more extreme left on a lot of issues. [10:27] And I think people like John Fetterman, who have views that probably reflect a more moderate, [10:33] or at least historically moderate Democrat position, are really kind of people without a home. [10:37] So if he ever comes to the conclusion that he's ready to move, we would certainly welcome it. [10:43] Thank you. [10:44] Thank you.